I am not seeing anything in your post that directly addresses this statement of mine:

Reagan's fiscal policy of tax rate cuts is what made inflation drop. The tax rates dropped significantly, which created more discretionary after tax money, which meant more spending, which increased demand for money, which meant the Fed needed to provide more money, which meant the Fed supplied more money that was actually useful for something other than manipulating the price level. This only happened because of Reagan and his tax policies and would not, and did not, happen under Carter's fiscal policies.

Volcker’s policies were pretty close under Carter as they were under Regan, but with a worsening effect on inflation. There was a symbiotic relationship between Volcker’s policies, at the behest of Reagan, and the tax rate cuts of Reagan. The tax rate cuts would not have dropped the inflation rate at the staggering rate and pace that it dropped alone and the Fed’s policies would not have dropped the inflation rate at the staggering rate and pace that it dropped alone. The rate of inflation dropped significantly along with the tax rates.

This has not been addressed: MV = Py does not necessary equal inflation. The increase in M causes an increase in P only if assumptions are made and M is defined with a general agreement, which today it is not.

I see what your problem is, then: TERRIBLE reading comprehension. Mankiw is saying that fiscal policy had NOTHING to do with why inflation dropped, and in fact was working in the OPPOSITE direction, and would have made inflation WORSE:

Volcker did succeed at reducing inflation. Inflation came down from almost 10 percent in 1981 and 1982 to about 4 percent in 1983 and 1984. Credit for this reduction in inflation goes completely to monetary policy. Fiscal policy at this time was acting in the opposite direction. The increases in the budget deficit during the Reagan administration were expanding aggregate demand, which tends to raise inflation. The fall in inflation from 1981 to 1984 is attributable to the tough anti-inflation policies of Fed Chairman Paul Volcker."

I shall address the rest of your economic illiteracy later. In the meantime, try to focus on what Mankiw is actually saying here, and how it utterly CONTRADICTS what you are saying.

I see what your problem is, then: TERRIBLE reading comprehension. Mankiw is saying that fiscal policy had NOTHING to do with why inflation dropped, and in fact was working in the OPPOSITE direction, and would have made inflation WORSE:

Volcker did succeed at reducing inflation. Inflation came down from almost 10 percent in 1981 and 1982 to about 4 percent in 1983 and 1984. Credit for this reduction in inflation goes completely to monetary policy. Fiscal policy at this time was acting in the opposite direction. The increases in the budget deficit during the Reagan administration were expanding aggregate demand, which tends to raise inflation. The fall in inflation from 1981 to 1984 is attributable to the tough anti-inflation policies of Fed Chairman Paul Volcker."

I shall address the rest of your economic illiteracy later. In the meantime, try to focus on what Mankiw is actually saying here, and how it utterly CONTRADICTS what you are saying.

I made specific economic statements. You have yet to address the specific statements.

Yes, you did. You made specific economic statements, that Professor Mankiw flatly contradicted. I don't know how to help you comprehend that any more than I have already tried.

For example, you have claimed......REPEATEDLY.....that "Reagan's fiscal policy of tax cuts is what made inflation drop". Professor Mankiw, to the CONTRARY, says that "Credit for the reduction in inflation goes COMPLETELY to monetary policy", meaning that fiscal policy gets ZERO credit. And he furthermore adds that "Fiscal policy at this time was acting in the OPPOSITE direction", or, in other words, on its own, would have made inflation WORSE.